You seem to have a habit of dismissing exercises that others here like a lot. Bench Press is not the "worst chest exercise", it's just very common and very commonly done wrong, so of course there are relatively more injuries than with other exercises. Why not ask for ways to mitigate those issues in a more constructive manner?

_________________Stu Ward_________________Let thy food be thy medicine, and thy medicine be thy food.~HippocratesStrength is the adaptation that leads to all other adaptations that you really care about - Charles Staley_________________Thanks TimD

I just dont see logical reason for doing half reps for chest with big weights when you can do full range with less. I think with pec dec machine that has horrible design is worst because you can replace them with safer excercises. Bench is second worst considered with accidents. Experienced lifters constantly are getting hurt because it taxes rotators.

Im also annoyed that some people think you need do press movements to make your chest muscles grow bigger which is not true at all.

I'm tired of this bb.com mentality "if you don't squat/bench then you're phaggot".

Guess what? Dorian Yates won 6x mr.olympia without barbell squats.

Here is Dorian comment about bench press:

" 95 % of bodybuilders, athletes, powerlifters, that have a pec tear, I don’t even need to ask them how they did it, they did it on bench press, yeah, so bench press officialy is a ****ty pec exercise, yeah, is very dangerous, you risk tearing your tendon, unless you’re a powerlifter don’t even do it, forget about it, forget about that exercise yeah, there are much more effective exercises for your pecs, decline press is way better, low incline’s way better, dumbell flyes are way better and you eliminate that injury risk, why risk getting injured for something that’s not really giving any benefit"

The last word "benefit" is exactly word that I'm only after. If it's replacable then why do it? Caveman complex?

He mentions only pec tear but we all know it's even more toxic for shoulders.

Last edited by excore on Fri Apr 04, 2014 8:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.

1) Yates suffered a number of serious injuries during his bodybuilding career, so maybe he's not the best example to make your case.2) Decline and incline presses are both major compound exercises. They're not much different from regular bench presses.3) Yates was a bodybuilder. He was interested looks, not performance. ... For bodybuilding leg presses are arguably superior to squats, since they allow you to build big quads without getting a big butt. For strength, sports performance, general fitness, and pretty much anything else squats (back or front) are superior.

Does that mean if tennis players and baseball pitchers drop bench presses from their training routines they won't develop shoulder problems?

hoosegow wrote:

C'mon - guy's a troll.

Maybe excore will write a book on his exercise theories and become an exercise guru. Until then, the label seems to fit. Too bad. Dissenting voices are welcome here, but not if they presume to know what's best for anyone but themselves. Barbell bench presses aren't a good chest exercise for me, either. But someone with shorter arms might have better results.

One size fits all training is nonsense. People with different physical abilities and attributes train for different reasons in the weight room.

95% of people do bench press because the gains it gives can't be beaten by any isolation exercises, it's a tried and true exercise. Some of my best results in tricep and pec development came from bench press. People who you see getting "injured" from bench press are probably the same people doing the chest arms and abs routine and forgetting the rest of the body exists (Back legs shoulders etc etc), and those imbalances within the body are more likely to be the culprit towards injury from bench press. The people who participate regularly on this forum aren't a bunch of clowns like you WILL find on BB.com or other similar websites.

Maybe this website just isn't for you though if you feel that everyone here that is giving you advice is "in the dark," check out crossfit...

I was going to quote messages seperately but I was thinking that it really doesn't matter and this like allmost all my threads in here comes down to just one thing: Compound vs Isolation.

Maybe I should just made that named topic instead being hostile to certain movements. Now here are two choices:

1. I consider big compound movements bad because it allows you to use much heavier weight. Now you have X+X+X+X=? total weight on your muscle/spine/tendon/rotators.

2. While removing big compounds You have X=? or X+X=? You're using much less weight. Also add fact that you have advantage of using wide range of motion so you have to lower even more weight to hit failure.

Since #2 gives equal muscle/strenght development I do not see reason to do #1.

Now we asking question: What's the aim?

For athlethic purpouse you train muscles stronger/bigger and adapt it to sport. You don't need compound movement for that. Key word here is adapt. You're good at what you do. By training your sport you have all your motoric skills but by adding strenght/muscle you can improve in it.

For health purpouse #2 is superior because full range of motion + less weights allow you do equal work as #1 but less % chance for injury.

But since this is about bench press. I give you example of Bench Press vs Flyes in cable. Well it's 100% same thing chest mechanic wise except in flyes you're doing 45 degrees more range of motion. Actually that last 45% degrees there is scapula abduction involved unlike allmost none bench press so you actually train serratus+pectoralis minor too.

Exact same movement but you're forced to use on flyes much much less weights. At least 4x less. No pressure for rotators eather.

"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is."-Yogi Berra

No offense, but your posting looks like something someone who spends more time in the library than the gym would write - theory versus practice. If isolation exercises are superior to compound exercises, one would expect professional trainers to emphasize isolation exercises in the exercise routines that they design for their clients. They don't - because routines made up of compound exercises produce better results. They also take less time to do - something that non-gym rats appreciate.

If you prefer to train using isolation exercises, that's fine. It's your workout, after all. Good luck

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum